Liberty by default
Government should generally leave people alone unless they are threatening somebody else's life, liberty, rights, or safety, or there is a public problem ordinary choice and competition cannot reasonably solve.
Use the lowest level of government that can do the job.
I don't think Richmond should make a statewide rule simply because it can. My starting point is individual choice first, local government next, then state or federal power when the problem genuinely cannot be handled lower down.
Local when possible
Counties, cities, school boards, and communities should have broad room to govern themselves, bounded by constitutional rights.
Transparent when government acts
Votes, major meetings, lobbying contacts, financial interests, earmarks, and official decisions should be easy for the public to inspect unless disclosure creates a genuine security problem.
Personal belief
I can think something is wrong without wanting it banned.
That distinction runs through a lot of my positions. My faith and personal morality tell me how I should live. They do not automatically give government a reason to force the same choice on another adult.
When another person's rights, a child, coercion, fraud, violence, or a serious public harm enters the picture, the government case gets stronger. Otherwise, my instinct is to leave the decision with the person making it.
Checks on power
Government should be hard to hide and hard to entrench.
Term limits
I support term limits broadly. Public office should not become a permanent possession.
Redistricting
I favor requiring more than a bare majority to redraw political districts. A supermajority makes it harder for whichever side controls the room to write the map by itself.
Property rights
Eminent domain should be exceptionally difficult and require an overwhelming public need, with above-market compensation and real relocation help long before forced taking is considered.
Privacy
I oppose broad government surveillance and many uses of facial recognition. Children should receive especially strong protection from government or corporations collecting and keeping personal data.
AI
I support rules around autonomous weapons, deepfakes, high-stakes automated government decisions, privacy, frontier-model safety, and children's use. New technology does not make old civil-liberty questions disappear.
Public records
If government is spending public money or exercising public power, documentation and public access should be the default, not an afterthought.
Regulation
Not all regulation is the same.
I want fewer licensing and compliance rules that mainly make it harder for new businesses to compete. I am much more comfortable regulating genuine safety risks, environmental damage, natural monopolies, fraud, public institutions, and situations where one side has no realistic way to protect itself.
The question I want asked is not simply "regulation or no regulation?" It is: what harm are we preventing, does the rule actually prevent it, and is there a less intrusive way to get there?
Rights should not depend on who happens to be in charge.
I broadly support the Constitution as it stands and want Virginia government to take constitutional limits seriously. If a fundamental right needs stronger protection, I would rather address that directly than let government invent a convenient workaround.
See related positions